Los Angeles daily herald., 1887-08-18
PERKINS VS.. BALDWIN.
The Fair Louise Material
ICES the Court.
INTERESTING AFFIDAvITS.
Both Sides of the Story Of the
Compromise in Writing.

Will W&O StNiiSo III uNEO " AhSiNShy
court yesterday morning at 10 o'clock
there were present about as many
spectators as could possibly crowd int,
the circumscribed limits of the court
room and, had the space within it,
walls been larger, it is more thar
likely that it would have been occu
pied. The fair Louisa was represented
by Messrs. White and Williams, anG
f. j. Baldwin by Messrs. Wells ant
Vandyke and Lee.
AS the hour of 10 o'clock was neareC
the eyes of those present sought the
door in the hope that Louisa would
appear, but these were disappointed
for the clock struck the hour, and the
counsel walked in unaccompanied by
either plaintiff or defendant.
When the case was called, Mr.. Lee
for the defendant, moved for a con-
tinuance on the ground of surprise ol
the defendant and counsel, in that the
plaintiff and defendant had agreed
upon compromise for $12 900, in con-
sideration of which she had made, ex-
ecuted and delivered to defendant
release in writing, forever
discharging, acquiting and re-
lieving defendant from any and all
demands arising out of or sued upon
in the cause of action in the complaint
herein, and relying thereon he and
they had not and are not now prepared
for trial upon the merits thereof at
this time. That now for the first time
since said compromise of said action
the defendants counsel are advised of
the fact that plaintiff insists upon a
trial of said action on the merits
thereof. That heretofore and up to
the present time defendant and his
counsel have relied upon the good
faith of plaintiff in making said COM
promise and in executing said release
and have relied upon the fact that she
would not insist upon or allow said
action to be prosecuted upon the
merits of the same, but that the same
would be dismissed upon the produc-
ton in court of said release.
Second-Absence of the defendant
and his witnesses, the said absence
being occasioned by the reliance of
defendant and his counsel upon the
good faith of plaintiff in making said
compromise aforesaid, and upon the
further reliance of defendant and his
counsel upon the fact that laintiff
would not insist upon or allow said
action to be further prosecuted
and that the same would be dis
missed. Third, that defendant has
been deceived by the plaintiff herein,
and was not undeceived by her until
after the argument of the motion to
dismiss, upon the ground that the
same had been settled by the plaintiff
and that plaintiff had released de-
tendant from all liability on account
of the action, which motion was
argued after the case was called for
trial, on the 10th day of August, 1887.
II. A. UNRUH.
The substance of Mr.. Unruh's affi-
davit is that on June 2Sth last Miss
Perkins received from him, as Bald
wins agent, $4,000, in full settle
meut of the issue, and releasing the
defendant from all responsibility and
that, on the 23d of July, Hon. e..
Wiley Wells, Baldwin's attorney, re-
ceived information from the plaintiff
that the case had been settled by her.
The attorneys advised Unruh that the
contract was valid and binding, and
that the defendant need not be present
when the case should come up. Upon
this advice, Mr.. Baldwin had made no
preparation to go with the trial. No
subptenas had been served on wit
nesses in the case from many counties.
That, furthermore, the defendant had
gone East, and is now in New York.
The plaintiff has deceived and sur
prised the defendant. 1t will take
much time to prepare for trial, and
therefore continuance is prayed for.
G. WILEY WELLS
Sets forth, on oath, the fact that he is
the senior counsel in the case. The
facts of the compromise are set forth
as i'm the Unruh oath. Also. the matter
of abstaining from getting ready to try
the cause, is dwelt upon. They relied
apon the validity of the contract and
the good faith of the plaintiff, and,
therefore, receiving no notice of any
sort that she would appear to prosecute
the case in spite of her
contract, all hands are taken
by surprise and are not prepared to
90 on with the trial. The necessity
of the defendants being present is in
sisted on; and on these grounds a
continuance is asked for.
Mr.. White asked time to examine
the affidavits and file reply, but he
objected to an extended continuance.
Judge O'Melvaney said that the de-
fendant having the document signed
by the plaintiff and knowing nothing
to the contrary, supposed that 1t
would be sufficient cause for the
dismissal of the action. Mr.. White
said that they intended to set forth
in the counter affidavit the fact that
the defendant did know that action
would be taken to bring the cause to
trial.
Mr.. Wells desired to state that un-
til the last time the matter came up
in court he had supposed from what
he had been informed that the couu-
sci for the plaintiff would move for
the dismissal of the action.
Mr.. White said that Mr.. Wells
mind had been relieved of that idea
some time since.
Judge O'Melveney continued the
case until l O'Clock, in order to give
counsel for the plaintiff time to pre-
pare a counter affidavit, whcreupon
the spectators relieved the courtroom
of their presence.
AFTERNOON BUSINESS.
If possible there were more persons
present in the court room at O'Clock
than in the morning, and as the hour
set for further hearing was reached a
considerable sensation was expert
enced when Mrs. Perkins and daughter
Louise walked into the room and took
seats beside Mr.. Williams. Miss
Louise did not appear to be in the
same good health which she enjoyed
when last seen in the court room. In
n